S/PV.2139 Security Council

In accordance with the decision taken at the 2132nd meeting, I invite the representative of the South West -4frica People’s Organization (SWAPO) to take a place at the Council table. Provisi&l agenda (S/Agenda/2139) 1. Adoption of the agenda At the invitation of the President, Mr. Gurirab (South West Africa People’s Organization) took a place at the Council table. 2. Complaint by Angola against South Africa: Letter dated ‘16 March 1979 from the Permanent Representative of Angola to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/13176)

I wish to inform the Council that the delegation of Gabon has become a sponsor of the draft resolution in document S/13197. The meeting was called to order at 4.45 p.m. 4. I shall now make a statement in my capacity as representative of NIGERIA. Adtidtion of the agenda The agenda was adopted. 5. The complaint against South Africa contained in the letter dated 16, March 1979 from the representative of Angola [5/131763 is the subject of our present debate. The letter does not reflect the degree and intensity of the atrocities committed by South Africa against Angola and neighbouring States. Complaint by Angola ‘against South Africa: Letter dated 16 March 1979 from the Permanent Representative of Anj$la to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/13176)

In accordance with the decisions taken by the Council at previous meetings [213&h, 2132nd. 2133rd, 2135th and 2138th meetings], I invite the representative of Angola to take a place at the Council table and the representatives of Algeria, Benin, Botswana, Bulgaria, the Congo, Cuba, Egypt, Ethiopia, the German Democratic Republic, Ghana, Guinea, Guyana, India, Liberia, Madagascar, Mozambique, Romania, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sri Lanka, the Sudan, Togo, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, the United Republic of Tanzania, Viei Nam and Yugoslavia to take the places reserved for them at the side of the Council chamber. 6. We recall the alliance between South Africa and the former Fascist Portugal to ,maintain their stranglehold on Angola and Mozambique. We yet recall with considerable consternation that even ‘the reality of Angolan independence appears still to be unaccepted by the racists, who in desperation are contriving to ‘reverse the inevitable course of history and the southward thrust of nationalism in southern Africa. We cannot but recall also the massive invasion of Angola in 1975, with the support or connivance of some Western Powers. Even today those Powers wear blinkers and remain in their fuced grooves. They glibly equate the struggle for freedom, self-determination and independence with the ideologies and doctrines of those friends of African redemption who afford nationalist forces material support to fight their enemy and to fight for their independence. At the invitation of the President, Mr. de Figueiredo (Angola) took a place at the Council table and Mr. Bouayad-Agha (Algeria), Mr. Houngavou (Benin), Mr. Tiou (Botswana), Mr. Yankov (Bulgaria), Mr. Mondjo (Congo), Mr. Roa Kouri (Cuba), Mr. Abdel Meguid (Egypt), Mr. Worku (Ethiopia). Mr. Florin (German Democratic Republic), Mr. Sekyi (Ghana). Mr. Yansanc! (Guhea), Mr. Sinclair (.Guyana), Mr. .&i&al (b&a), Mr. Tubman (Liberia), Mr. Rabetafika (Madagascar), Mr. Honwona (Mozambique), Mr. Marinescu (Romania), Mr. Gelaga-King (Sierra Leone), Mr. Hussen (Somalia), 7. We should remind ourselves that South Africa revels in illegality and musketeers with Ian Smith to harass independent African States in order to muzzle them. 8. The Angolan tragedy becomes more tragic when those who extol noble values in their foreign-policy posturt: appear convinced that the nationalist forces are the enemy because of their apparent ideological orientation. The real 9. Political power-play may be diplomacy for some, but it cannot lead to the search for truth and justice in honour. Even in our world today, power, prestige and profit cannot suppress honour, truth and justice. 10. The value systems in societies evolve as man becomes more civilized. Yet in recent times the.dominant influence has not been religion or truth but, rather, the expediency of power-the power that money can buy. In consequence, race is pitched against race, colour against colour, rich against poor, and technology is used at the expense of humanism. 11. The conflict-types-or, rather, the antitheses of truth, honour and justice-could be unravelled and their dialectics synthesized in order to attain greater heights in human relations. Instead, the world is involved in a melodrama, the evolution of idioms and rhetoric, and cliches and double talk. Where do we go from here? After the long years of the subjugation of the black race, after the enslavement of Africa, after the colonization of the continent, after settler usurpation and plunder of the richest part of Africa by settler racist colonialists, one would have thought that these same colonial Powers and their allies should pay due attention to the cries of Africa for freedom and human dignity. But, alas, we continue to see a head-on collision on the horizon: white versus black and power conflicts par exc&ence. Yes, we see the whole world versus a few hard-core elements holding forth for kith and kin. 12. I have dwelt on this at considerable length because I am one who, on a daily basis, has had to deal with the tragedy of southern Africa in the course of my duty over the last three years. Mine is therefore a very different perspective. I see no silver lining at all. 13. In southern Africa we continue to see a situation unfolding which goes beyond our preoccupations over Angola today. 14. We recall when the United Kingdom and the United States accepted the voluntary arms embargo. That voluntary embargo had a loophole through which France, a non-participant in NATO military planning, supplied South Africa with arms without in any way blemishing NATO, while the former Fascist Portugal acquired NATO materials and the wherewithal to keep the outer flanks of South Africa secure. The miner?1 basket of copper, chrome, diamonds, gold and uranium of South Africa was thereby made the preserve of the West and therefore had to remain in white hands. A partnership was brought into play. The wealth and economic power of the United States, on the one hand, and the technology of Europe, on the other, were brought together, resulting in a quantum leap in technology in the West. This was made available to South Africa on a kith-and-kin basis. In contrast, African and non-European countries were bypassed in this new economic axis. 15. South Africa is now a real military power in Africa. Its marauding incursions into neighbouring independent : -First, the continued economic and social support from Western States, particularly resource and technology transfers. -Secondly, the lack of military capability of front-line States. the colonial Powers having left Africa militarily defenceless. In our independence, we rejected defence pacts. Even efforts to build up military capacity for self-defence are often resisted. We have been left too weak and balkanized to afford the diversion of resources to self-defence. -Thirdly, the cautious defence support provided by the major Powers is no match for the flow of military hardware to South Africa. Even the modest Cuban co-operation with Angola in the defence of its territorial integrity and independence is maligned for ideological reasons. 16. I recall a meeting of the Council exactly two years ago to deliberate on the South African invasion of Angola in the .wake of Angola’s independence. South Africa’s massive invasion led to the occupation of vast areas of southern Angola for several months. The occupation was characterized by murder, wanton destruction of property, and the pillage of bank vaults, as well asthe theft of numerous other movables. Thousands of Angolans, under armed coercion and intimidation, were herded into Namibian territory. * l.ll SC< 17. It is obvious that the immediate objective of this exercise was to destabilize Angola. Thii’destabilization was in the long term aimed at limiting the ,role and possible sup port of Angola for the southward ‘liberation thrust of the oppressed black people. Even though the withdrawal of the racist armed forces was effected, the destabilization of Angola continues unabated through UNITA [Unih Nucional para a Zndependhcia Total de Angola] elements which constitute the surrogates of the racists and their supporters on Angola’s borders. lg. We also recall Kassinga, a place where about one ‘thousand innocent women and children were murdered in cold blood in a further racist invasion of Angola by South African forces. Many of the victims of Kassinga were shot in the back as they fled. This, like other blind incursions into and invasions of States neighbouring South Africa and Rhodesia, is automatically witnessed by Western media from thousands of miles away as attacks on guerrilla camps. ‘19. The staggered approach to the problems of southern Africa has created growing apprehension. The process of peaceful negotiation has given greater leverage to South Africa and its minions in Southern Rhodesia to commit, in growing dimensions, genocide against Afri- .cans in their own land. Yet we persevere and persist in pursuing this peaceful option to save life and restore sanity in southern Africa. 20. One cannot fail to question the apparent sch& phrenic posture of South Africa as well as that of Rhodesia. South African forces, by their war footing, are in a state of war with front-line States. Yet South Africa claims to be a party to the evolving of a negotiated settlement of the 21. The authors of the Anglo-American proposals, who promised to deliver Southern Rhodesia, have abandoned their programme, all except on paper. They have progressively allowed a few among the 200,000 whites in Rhodesia to continue to control power. We witnessed the first phase of the internal settlement process in Rhodesia in March last year. Next month the international community will be faced with a situation in Rhodesia which liberals and conservatives in Western countries will gloat to embrace. The South,Africans also appear to have the same game plan. in.Namibia. 28. I now resume my function as PRESIDENT of the Council. 29. It is my understanding that the Council is ready to proceed to a vote on the draft resolution which is before it. A number of delegations have asked to speak in explanation of vote before the vote and I now call on them.

South Africa’s acts of aggression against the People’s Republic of Angola are undoubtedly linked this time with the efforts of the Pretoria regime, while counting on the support of certain Western States, to win further concessions from SWAP0 and the front-line States on the issue of the liberation of Namibia, and even to achieve further compromise concessions in favour of South Africa, at the expense of the interests of the Namibian people. 22. SWAP0 has accepted all the aspects involved in the report of the Secretary-General based on resolution 435 (1978). Yet an impression is being created that both SWAP0 and South’Afrida are in default. A second series of internal elections. in Namibia following the pattern of Rhodesia is in the offing: , ?, % 23. We appear to have been faced with a fait accompli all along. But Nigeria, for its part, in co-operation with other front-line States% has played a full part in helping to move the peaceful process along in recent years and thereby avoid a racial conflagration in southern Africa. We hope that these peace initiatives will not be registered as failures. There is no way in which we can be convinced that a small band of whites led by Ian Smith can continue to defy the world and the,will of 6.5 million blacks and whites alike in Rhodesia. I wish to repeat for the umpteenth time that we cannot believe that where the honour, power and prestige of those two great nations have been brought to bear on issues of this puny nature, they can report failure. 31. The Czechoslovak delegation believes that ’ the Security Council should strongly resist South Africa’s manceuvres by adopting all necessary measures to ensure compliance with ,United Nations resolutions aimed at giving the Namibian people genuine independence. We should not go on trying to exert pressure on SWAPO, which is the only legitimate representative of the people of Namibia. What we should have long been doing is exerting really effective pressure on those occupying Namibia-the racists. of Pretoria-and trying to force them to assume full responsibility for their aggressive policy towards sovereign African States and for their refusal to comply with United Nations resolutions, including those of the Security Council on the question. 24. The Western five have still to reaffirm their commitment to deliver South Africa so that we can move forward in achieving Pretoria’s exit from Namibia. One week after the end of the proximity talks, there is no word-no whisper-from South Africa. b 32. The results of the Security Council’s discussions of South Africa’s acts of aggression against neighbouring African States, and the Pretoria regime’s total disregard of Council resolutions, with the connivance of certain Western circles, show that mere condemnations by the Council of repeated acts of aggression by the South African racists are far from effective. Therefore, the Czecho- Slovak delegation, in the course of this discussion in the ‘Council, has supported the complaints of the Angolan Government against the aggressive actions of Pretoria and upheld the demands of African delegations that the Council should finally take measures to force South Africa to comply with United Nations decisions, ensure the Namibian people the earliest possible independence and put an end to South Africa’s repeated acts of aggression against sovereign African States. In this context, we supported the entirely natural demands of the People’s Republic of Angola and other African States that the Council should finally decide to impose sanctions against South Africa in accordance, with Chapter VII of the Charter. Unfortunately, however, we have seen that individual representatives, even some who have quite strongly 25. The Western Powers cannot cqntinue,to veto peaceful measures envisaged ‘under the Charter of the United Nations and, in the same breath, continue to collaborate in the economic, military and nuclear fields with their valued ally South Africa-or so we see the scenario. One can see a credibility gap in the issue here. 26. It is one thing to react to issues like Sharpeville, Soweto and the murder of Steve Biko and other South African heroes; it is another to bring pressure tu bear on South Africa. It is one thing to shore up support against the Cuban presence in Angola; it is another thing to look into the root-causes of that presence there. It is one thing to support Western interests in Shaba; it is another to end the causes of tension in that whole area-tension caused by colonialism and the existence of racist regimes in the region. 33. The Czechoslovak delegation views the provisions of draft resolution S/l3197 as inadequate and not in keeping with the demands of the moment, taking into account the provisions of paragraph 8 of resolution 428 (1978), unanimously adopted on 6 May 1978, in which the Council decided “to meet again in the event of further acts of violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the People’s Republic of Angola by the South African racist regime in order to consider the adoption of more effective**-and I stress “more effective”-“measures, in accordance with the appropriate provisions of the Charter of the United Nations, including Chapter VII thereof ‘. However, my delegation will vote for this draft resolution because it is acceptable to our Angolan friends.

The United Kingdom’s unswerving commitment to an early and peaceful settlement in Namibia is well known. The negotiations on the implementation of resolution 435 (1978) have reached possibly their most delicate state. I should like to draw the Council’s attention to the Secretary- General’s appeal in his report of 26 February 1979 to all parties “to exercise restraint and refrain from actions which might jeopardize the settlement** [S/13120, para. 181. The United Kingdom fully supports the Secretary- General’s appeal. 35. We naturally deplore South African attacks on Angola, as we condemn attacks and violence coming from whatever quarter. The loss in human life’and the destruction caused by this violence must end now. The best way to bring about an end to the violence is for the cease-fire provided for in the proposal of the Western five and in the Secretary-General’s report to be put into effect as urgently as possible. It must be recognized, however,,that progress towards a cease-fire can only be achieved if all those involved are now prepared to take the positive actions necessary to put into practice the peaceful settlement of the Namibia probIem. 36. We earnestly hope that the proximity talks held by the Foreign Ministers of the Five in New York last week will have helped to ensure a return to the path of peace. We do not believe, however, that this process will be helped by adopting this draft resolution at this very delicate juncture, only shortly-we must hope-before agreement is reached on a cease-fire. 37. It will not helu to brina about a cease-fire to argue about the aggress&e or violent activities of either &de. Nor is condemnation by the Security Council in itself a substitute for an actual end to the fighting through a cease-fire. The recent escalation of acts of violence has underlined the urgent need to secure an agreement which wil1 make it possible to introduce an effective United Nations presence in Namibia. We can well understand the inflamed passions that the recent raids and acts of violence have aroused. A new course must be charted in

The debate which began on 19 March has given us an opportunity to hear more than 4Ospeakers, most of them Africans, first and foremost among whom was the representative of Angola, who introduced the complaint of his country against South Africa. It is clear from his testimony, to which the French delegation listened with great attention, that the South African army has once again launched a series of attacks in Angolan territory. 40. France can only condemn and censure such a use of force. The loss of life has aroused our indignation and horror. These tragic events move usparticularly because they have taken place in a part of‘AfFica and in the midst of a people which have been experiencing great hardship for many years. The French delegation wishes to express its profound sympathy to the families who have recently been the victims of these incidents. -. 41. The armed incursions by’ .South Africa have, moreover, violated the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Angola. This is inadmissible conduct that might very well jeopardize the security of the region. 42. There is hardly need for me. to stress that South Africa’s raids do not facilitate a peaceful settlement ofthe question of Namibia. Indeed, they make it more difficult, and that settlement is clearly at the heart ofthe problem. It is clear that the northern borders of Namibia may very well remain an area of tension and the scene of serious incidents until Namibia achieves independence asa result of a-democratic process recognized by the international community. I 43. We must then direct our efforts to the implementation of the settlement plan adopted by the Security Council. France, with its four Western partners, is continuing to work along these lines. The,ministerial talks that took piace in New York on 19 and 20 March made it possible to define views and identify the final difftculties that need to be overcome on both sides.’ The front-line States represented in these talks and SWAP0 gave assurances on certain oints which may well remove certain’apprehensions. P t is to be hoped that the South African Government will overcome whatever reluctance itmay still have to accept certain details relating to implementation. 45. Turning now to the draft resolution that has been submitted in document S/13197, the French delegat.ion shares its general spirit and direction. We associate ourselves with the concern it expresses on various points and it ca.n endorse several of the recommendations and warnings it contains. -But certain formulations seem inappropriate. The members of the Council will understand that France, which with its Western partners is playing an active part in the settlement of the Namibian question, must continue to maintain a position that is in keeping with that situation. Consequently, the French delegation will abstain in the vote on the draft resolution. 52. Obviously South Africa could not persist in this policy if it did not enjoy the support and protection of a number of Western States. Surely a manifestation of that protection is. the fact that the delegation of the United States and certain other Western States abstained in the vote on the Council resolution just adopted. It was only in May last ‘year that those same Powers voted in favour of considering the question of applying sanctions against South Africa under Chapter VII of the Charter if there were further acts of aggression by -South Africa against Angola. And now they have refused even to consider this matter.

I shall now put to the vote the draft resolution hsponsored by Bangladesh, Bolivia, Gabon, Jamaica; Kuwait, Nigeria and Zambia, contained in document S/13197. A vote was taken by show of hands. 1 In favour: Bangladesh, Bolivia, China, Czechoslovakia, Gabon, Jamaica, Kuwait, Nigeria, Norway, Pdrtugal, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, Zambia Against: None . ’ \ ! Absraining: France, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America 53, The criminal actions of the Pretoria regime and its policy aimed at the ,perpetuation of colonialism and racism in southern Africa have been universally condemned. .The overwhelming majority of representatives of countries taking part in the meetings of the Council have expressed themselves unambiguously in favour ofthe adoption by the Council of the most vigorous measures in order to put an end to the acts of aggression of the South African ‘regime against neighbouring States, to call an immediate halt to the illegal occupation of Namibia by South Africa and toensure that the people ‘of Namibia will achieve genuine independence under the leadership of SWAPO. The draft resoiutioi was adopted by 12 votes to none, with 3 abstentions. *, ( ,

A number of delegations have asked to be allowed to speak after the vote, and I shall now call on them.

Norway voted in favour of the draft,resolution contained in document S/13197 since the recent attacks by South Africa against Angola and other front-line States constitute serious violations of the ,sovereignty and territorial integrity of those countries and must be condemned by the international community. 54. In the course of the Council’s work the manceuvres of the Pretoria regime aimed at hindering the free expression of the will of the people of Namibia have been unmasked and condemned. There has plso been criticism of the attempts of the Western Powers to demand further concessions from SWAP0 and the front-line States in connexion .with the United Nations operation in Namibia. 49. I should like to emphasize, however, in relation to paragraph 5, that the Norwegian Government, in accordance with its long-standing policy, will continue to provide only humanitarian and economic assistance to the front-line States. 55. In confirmation of its position on resolution 435 (1978). the Soviet delegation would like to recall in this regard the misgivings it expressed as to where this operation might lead and whether it could really ensure the exercise by the people of Namibia of, its right to selfdetermination. In the light of the manceuvres of South Africa, it is becoming very clear that the Security Council should thoroughly. scrutinize the question of how to implement that resolution; this is all the more necessary since the Council has so far not implemented resolution 439 (1978), which provided that the Security Council would. meet forthwith to initiate appropriate actions 50. With regard to paragraph 7 and the question of sanctions, the wording therein should not prejudge the outcome of the Council’s future deliberations on these matters. The various conflicts in southern Africa areinextricably linked. Measures taken by the Council must therefore be carefully examined also in terms of their over-all impact on the situation in the region, especially as regards their impact on ongoing attempts to reach negotiated settlements. ’ See resolution 447 (1979). 57. At the same time the Soviet delegation wishes to point out that the resolution does contain a strong condemnation of South Africa for its acts of aggression against Angola. The resolution also commends the firm position of Angola and the other front-line States which have supported the national liberation struggle of the people of Namibia and contains an appeal to Member States to give to Angola and the otherfront-line States all the necessary support to strengthen their defensive potential. On this basis the Soviet delegation voted in favour of the draft resolution.

On behalf of the Government of the United States, I wish to present some additional considerations on the situation in Namibia and to explain our position on the resolution which has just been adopted. 59. As you know, my Government, together with the Governments of the United Kingdom, France, the Federal Republic of Germany and Canada, has been intensively involved in an effort to find a peaceful solution to the problem of Namibia. Our vote on this resolution should be seen in the light of our role as mediators in this dispute. The United States strongly condemns the attacks on SWAP0 bases and refugee camps in Angola and Zambia which South Africa has undertaken in recent days. We believe that this kind of action is certainly not justified. We also condemn all other acts of violence by any party which have taken place in the Namibian context. If the events of recent days make anything clear, it is that the pattern of violence which has taken hold in Namibia and is now spreading into neighbouring States must be broken. 60. In our view, the way to the solution of the Namibian question is clear. The recent proximity talks in New York and subsequent discussions have produced, in the view of my Government, a basis on which we can now move toward a cease-fire and the deployment of the United Nations presence in Namibia and the initiation of the transitional period. We hope that no further impediments will. emerge. 61. Turningnow to the text of the resolution which the Council has just adopted, I should like to make some specific observations, 62. First, we have reservations regardingthe procedure established in paragraph 6 for obtaining information on the effects of the South African raids. The Council should,,whereverpossible, use methods of proven impartiality to obtain information. That is particularly true 63. As I have indicated, my Government is strongly of the view that the appropriate course, indeed the only course, for resolving the problem, is to begin the implementation of the United Nations plan for Namibia. 64. Secondly, my Government does not believe that a solution to the problem of Namibia can be found through the introduction of more arms and other forms of military assistance in an area which is already clearly suffering the effects of too many arms. Again, the only real solution is a peaceful one; force will not ultimately solve the problems of southern Africa and will only bring greater problems in its wake. Consequently, my Govemment does not interpret this resolution as condoning the presence of foreign military personnel in Angola or elsewhere in southern Africa or as implying that violence can resolve the issue.

1 call on the representative of Angola.

I have asked to speak once again in order to do two things. 67. I should like to express the appreciation of my Government and my delegation to all those colleagues and delegations that offered their unstinting support and co-operation to us during this debate. Many of them worked long hours, both in the Council and outsideit. 68. Our special thanks go to those delegations which not only verbally expressed their solidarity with us by making a statement in the Council but also supported us in our attempts to place the murderous and continuing barbarous acts of aggression.of the racist South Africans in their proper context, that is, as a threat to international peace and security-hence the applicability of Chapter VII of the Charter. 1 69. We are also aware of those delegations which, while recognizing the correctness of our position, nevertheless sought to protect South Africa from the sanctions which we feel are justified and inevitable. 70. To those delegations which abstained in the vote on the draft resolution, despite the fact that it was a much milder one than the circumstances warranted, all I can say is that once again Africa has been made painfully aware of their position, of their paying lip service to principles of international law and humanitarian concepts, and of their continued allegiance to imperialist and colonialist links. In that sense, every act of aggression against us in southern Africa is perpetrated not only by the racist regime of South Africa but also by its Western imperialist allies. We construe that as support for the aparzheid system, for imperialist exploitation and repression, all protestations to the contrary. 71. Ultimately, we shall triumph. Until then, the struggle continues. 75. Bearing all this in mind, the Portuguese delegation wishes to reserve its position in relation to any future action to be taken by the Council on the present matter. 73. * Nevertheless, we have difficulties in accepting certain passages of the, resolution, namely, paragraph 7, which seems to prejudge the issue and predetermine the conclusions to be drawn by the Council from the report of the Secretary-General. . . The meeting rose at 5.35 p.m. . . I ‘/ ‘ : * . f . . . ., ‘. .- 1 ‘: HOW T? OBTAIN UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATIONS Unite 1 Nations publications may be obtained from bookstores and distributors throughout the world. Consult your bookstore or write to: United Nations, Sales Section, New York or Geneva. COMMENT SE PROCURER LES PUBLICATIONS DES NATIONS UNIES Les publications des Nations Unies sent en vente dans les librairies et les agences d&ositaires du monde entier. Informer-vous aupr&s de votre libraire ou adressez-vous A : Nations Unies. Section des ventes. New York ou Ge&ve. ICAIi IIOJIYUZfTb H3AAHNfl OPI-AHLI 3AUHZI OD’bE,!WHEHHhIX HAUIIR COMO CONSEGUIR’PUBLICACIONES DE LAS NACIONES UNIDAS Las pubiicaciones de las Naciones Unidas estin en venta en librerias y casas distribuidoras en todas partes de1 mundo. Consulta a su librero o dirijase a: Naeiones Unidas, Secci6n de Ventas, Nueva York o Ginebra. Litho in United Nations, New York Price: $U.S 1.50 79-70002-December 1981-2.250